African American Imperialism
In definition colonialism is the situation where by the strong country control the weak country in socially, economically, and politically normally these strong country introduce little benefits or not to the weakest so as to get more from them, such they doing is like introduction of education which based on the their side, example they introduce their culture, example adoption of the Western culture in Africa. Also these strong country they introduce crops which benefit them, example cash crops, sisal introduced in Africa by German. Due to all above, it shows that the colonialism in Africa was, due to a number of reasons. This essay will attempt to discuss the merits and demerits derived by Africa from the European colonial experience by
…show more content…
the first quarter of the 20th century.
Since colonialism involves the rule or taking of territory of one people by another and without their consent, many people believe that the worst effect of colonialism is the fact that a country, takes land rightfully belonging to natives without any consent, and generally mistreating the natives afterwards. Though whether or not this is the worst effect or not can be contended, it definitely plays a major role in the debate of colonialism. During the Colonial period Tanzania for example has had many benefits in terms of infrastructure at the expense of the population.”(1)
When Europeans divided Africa, most colonizers cared mainly about gold, diamonds, and other resources. The Europeans knew little about Africa’s political and social systems. Many Europeans looked down on Africa’s rich cultures and tried to make Africans more like Europeans. Europeans also created conflicts among ethnic groups that had not existed before. For example, the Belgian rulers of Rwanda-Burundi insisted that everyone carry identity cards saying whether they were Hutu, the ethnic majority, or Tutsi, the minority that had ruled the Hutu. Many people did not know which of these they were. The Belgians decided that anyone who owned more than ten cows was Tutsi. The Tutsi got the best education and jobs. Soon the Hutu were resentful, and a violent conflict began. In 1994, the conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi escalated into a brutal civil war. The Tutsi were victorious and formed a new government in Rwanda. (2)
“Africa did not share in the economic boom that lasted for the first three years of federation. They were taxed on things they bought in the shops such as clothing, footwear and dried milk, and they were charged high prices by white and Asian traders. As prices went up, African wages came down. Socially things were not better. The Race Relating Board was ineffectual. The Moffat Revolutions of 1954 said that everyone had the right to progress according to character, qualifications, training, ability and education without distinction of race, colour and creed but these high-sounding resolutions were never put into effect. There were many instances of racial discrimination. The Lusaka city council tarred the road to the European hospital but not the 180 metres to the African hospital.” (3)
Furthermore, “a white man killed his African employee and was jailed for only a year, but when an African robbed his white employer, he was jailed for five years. The government did little for African education as ANC pointed out, if the government had the principle of partnership at heart, it must give the Africans the same opportunity and standard of technical education and training as the European”. (4)
“Rhodes was supported in the Cape parliament by Hofmeyr’s Afrikaner Bond, which was attracted by his policies encouraging the development of agricultural capitalism. Rhodes government promoted wine exports set, set up a Ministry of Agriculture to aid meat and fruit production, and extended railway lines to carry agricultural produce to market as well as opening up the Northern Cape colony for white settlement.”(5)
“Rhodes proclaimed himself in favour of equal right for every white man south of the Zambezi to bring Afrikaners and English together for a new Cape – dominated confederation. Inheritance of plots was to be by elderly sons only, so that younger sons would have to go to the colony in search of labour. Landless men had to pay an extra labour tax if they did not work abroad. As Rhodes said, “Every black man cannot have three acres and a cow….. it must be brought to them that in future nine-tenths of them will have to spend their lives in daily labour.” In exchange for representation of headman in a local district council, all parliament representation for Glen Grey district was abolished and the sale of liquor was to Africans was banned.” (6)
Then others are that the “human disaster of colonization by whites, and helped to spread off desperate Africans risings against colonial rule. After all it was ox-wagons, mostly owned by whites, which spread the disease and even if it was not deliberately spread by whites to reduce Africans to poverty, it had that effect when whites shot African cattle indiscriminately to prevent the disease spreading.”(7)
“Resistance to colonialism did not only take the form of armed risings led by traditional leaders. Individuals and groups, who might have otherwise welcomed and collaborated with colonialism, protected the aspects of colonial rule such as land alienation or racial discrimination. They made their protests by diplomacy rather than by open revolt.”(8) Apparent collaborators with colonialism, such as Christian converts, often became the most effective resister, and it is out of their secondary resistance to colonial rule that modern nationalist movements developed. On the other hand, the closest collaborators with colonialism – black policemen and mercenaries – were often drawn from the ranks of defeated primary resisters.
From a linguistic viewpoint, one could possibly say that an advantage was the language contact between the coloniser and colonised countries - so the acquisition of English. However the downside was that slaves were not allowed to speak their 'home' languages (for fear of rebellion plots) and eventually lost most of their 'native' languages. Colonialism has always had a bad reputation, with dissidents complaining that it disrupted the peaceful existence of the African society. Others have gone so far to claim that the trouble of Africa is directly related to Colonialism. Chinua Achebe, Mongo Beti and a host of other authors have written blatantly against colonialism. The only exception was Camara Laye, whose favourable setting of Africa was savagely attacked by Mongo Beti. He queried if Laye was not aware of the negative consequences of Colonialism in his native Guinea. Even Chinua Achebe's novel, Things Fall Apart, I think was written to counter the racist claims of Conrad’s novel, Heart of Darkness. (9)
On another note Christianity was already in Africa before the Europeans came to colonise us. A classic example is that of Ethiopia. Christianity was their national religion for years!!!And please do not say that it would never have spread to western Africa and other parts of Africa without colonialism. There were missionaries in many countries before the Europeans decided they wanted to colonise us. We were trading and interacting with Europeans before colonialism. Of course their religions would have spread to us as well through interaction. Africa would have continued changing and developing even without colonialism, because it is impossible for a people (continent) to live in isolation from the world. Africans had already been to North America before colonialism. (10)
Colonialism help to spread religion in particular Christianity to distant countries especially after the mid fifteenth century and after AD1500 when any powerful European countries e.g. Spain began to explore, and expand into the rest of the world. Many people were taken away to work on plantations and mines and therefore learnt many new skills. To add to the above post, shouldn't the first question, be whether these many people wanted to be forced to learn these 'new skills'? After all it wasn't an internship; people were being chained, beaten, raped and killed. A rather high price for the acquisition of learning to sow and reap crops and quarry, don't you think? One would say that any advantages of colonialism were to the European countries (e.g. Britain or Spain) and America. They had a supply of free labour and were able to take the natural resources (e.g. diamonds, gold etc) of the countries which they colonised. (11)
Dr. Livingstone, a missionary and explorer, contributed his life to Africa; to see the gospel proclaimed and discover the mysteries of Dark Africa. Dr. Sas Conradie states
"His (Livingstone's) three C's: Christianity, Civilization and Commerce became the epitome of imperialism, racial superiority and British economic self-interest."
When Livingstone established the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian in Malawi, it spread the Gospel to neighboring countries. African people realized that God loves them and that they can love Him as well was the greatest reward for Livingstone's efforts. Through this, they desired to become educated. Missionaries not only educated these people, but also gave hospital treatment. The Malawi received the name "Warm Heart" of Africa. Sadly this legacy remains under a tremendous threat because of Islam; wherever Christian missionaries have left the Muslims have pressed in to gain control of the Warm Heart.
Colonization in Africa differs to whether it was ultimately "good" or "bad." Struggles in Africa remain common, but inspired people like Dr. Livingstone reached out and showed them God's love. European powers that acquired African colonies primarily cared for themselves; their motives laid in selfishness. Imperialism did help Africa improve its technology, but the people's hearts remained unchanged until the missionaries were established. Exploitation of Africa continues to gradually fall away to Christian teaching of John 13:34, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." (12)
Exploitations of African natural resources such as Minerals, made African to be poor and to depend more in Europeans. Oppressions of Africans and discrimination of Africans such as race discrimination, this was mostly operating in South Africa at Soweto. Also importation of the colonialism in Africa societies led to the following, Intensive exploitations i.e. Land alienation, where Africans forced to live unfertile soil and the good and fertile soil remained by the colonialist, Forced labour, this is that African forced to work in Europeans large plantation and mine with little resting or not , Apart from the above the introduction of the principal and the laws of obtaining the cheap labour in the plantation would made Africans to be more exploited, this is that the working class were provided the card so as to be identified if they worked and those who are not they worked yet, a good example is Kenya which was called Kipande system this system was introduced by the British.(13)
Low wages, here African did hard work which were could not resembles with the wages paid too, Also the colonialist introduce many taxes so as to exploiting the African, these taxes were introduce so as to make Africans to work in the colonialist ,example of such taxes were Hart taxes, kettle taxes, and the head taxes, also Colonialist introduce the Migration labour where the Africans were taken from the low or unproductive areas to the productive areas to work in the plantations and mines, for example in Europe and America, due to this migration it caused loss of manpower in Africa.
Low price of the African Product also made them to be more exploited, that is African goods were sold in very low price which could not even satisfy their personal and the family needs, so due to this African they were themselves engaging in White activities. Similarly to this there were unequal exchange, that is African were exchanging the minerals, ivory which were exchanged by the spoon, cups low grade cloth and beads among others.
Colonialism also brings the layer between the Africans people that is those who are were benefit from the colonialist toward those who were not, due to this it create no unity among the people s of the African as well as the people within the country, hence due to this it bring instability in the country, example the conflict of the land in Kenya.
Also due the colonialism destruct totally Africa culture, this is that many African forgotten their culture and behave like European, people they don’t know they tradition language, food and to live, instead they speaking, dressing eating like European, hence due to this it demoralize the African people especially the youth. Because of wearing it make the people to be more attracted in sexual practice hence more spreading of HIV AIDS.
Despite of the above negative effect but also the colonialism bring some few positive effect, that is during colonialism there was the distribution of the social service, this is that, there is construction of infrastructure, schools and the hospitals which are used up to day, example university of Dar-es-salaam and many other building in South Africa and other area in Africa. Also the innovation of European religion and education brings some changes which benefit African, these education eliminate some bad culture practices and hence make African to match with the Globalization, example the use of Computer, car, and other machines. Apart from these, colonialism leads much development in the economic sector such as Agriculture, and mining sectors, the use modern tools and methods of cultivation, such as Tractors.
One unfortunate result of the African colonization, however, was the fact that the colonizers often mistreated the indigenous inhabitants in African colonies.
Officials in the Belgian Congo won first prize as the most abusive of almost any other colonizer in Africa. After Leopold finally got the Belgian Congo running and making a profit, rumors began to reach Europe of atrocities occurring in the Congo River basin. However, these remote rumors had few witnesses, and fewer who spoke up because Belgium often gave them tax cuts and other benefits to keep them quiet and happy. It was not until 1904 when the British Foreign Office published a report on the Belgian Congo by Casement, that the skeletons in Leopold II's closet became exposed. For in reality, Leopold II used the "Belgian" Congo as a private asset rather than a state colony. He did not care what happened to the inhabitants so long as he profited from the colony's resources. When the British Foreign Office published the report, France paid little attention to it because France had started to follow the lead of the Belgian Congo, exploiting the land at whatever cost to the natives. British humanitarians and Christians, however, were shocked. Great Britain certainly did not treat the natives in British colonies the best, but at least they did not treat them as slaves or wild animals as officials treated them in the Belgian Congo or French Equatorial Africa. …show more content…
(14)
With the European arrival in to Africa, it was followed by enslaving the local populace and in general causing chaos to the ancient social structures which had been formed over centuries by simply tearing it apart, using them all as slaves. This was followed by attempts at serious colonisation. However, from the extreme climate of the continent (ranging from arid to tropical) it was impossible to expand any further than having a few coastal settlements due to the lack of technology available to the Europeans to sustain an attempt without the colonists attriting away. However, even though slave trade was a reason why the Europeans came there were a few more. It was possible that there were many resources further in to the continent that were unavailable to the Western countries and the kingdoms in Europe were able to carve an empire in these foreign lands without intervention from other powers that would normally happen when conquest was attempted in their locality. There were explorers who came to the land lusting for riches and then there missionaries who wanted to "bring culture" to the natives and to convert them to the "true faith" or in pity of the Africans being sold en masse around the world in an attempt to change things.
"One unfortunate result of the African colonization, however, was the fact that the colonizers often mistreated the indigenous inhabitants in African colonies. Officials in the Belgian Congo won first prize as the most abusive of almost any other colonizer in Africa. After Leopold finally got the Belgian Congo running and making a profit, rumours began to reach Europe of atrocities occurring in the Congo River basin.
The old tribal life of the African locals had been undermined and annihilated by the colonists who showed complete contempt for it and during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries drove them from their rural lifestyles in to the new cities they were constructing in Africa.
These were poorly built, overpopulated and were in a terrible state. Even now, there are bitter reminders of their efforts to centralise the African communities in to big cities. They had been that way for millennia since the land hadn't supported large populations and that living in villages had meant that the spread of disease was minimal. If a village got it, it would remain a local issue and they would deal with it (or simply all die without a trace) but by concentrating them all in to cities, with the poor health levels already in place it simply meant that even the smallest disease would spread like a forest fire and cause a large death count. Despite this, the Europeans did bring a vast amount of technology with them. Since they needed it all to simply stay alive in the harsh climate it meant that the Africans were feeling the full effect of it. The colonists mingled with the local populaces too, which meant that they both learnt the ways of the Europeans and benefited from all the things they brought which would be advanced weaponry, industry, medicine and more. Even though all this helped African society to advance, the Europeans weren't teaching them anything. After the First and Second World
Wars, which had completely exhausted the European powers there were strong senses of nationalism on the continent and with the colonies now unprofitable, the Europeans gradually withdrew all the while granting independence to arbitrary states. (15)
It was as if the Europeans had come in to Africa, took everything they could get and simply walked out. When they drew up the borders for the new states, they were nothing but shoddy and they had failed to teach the Africans how to govern themselves after decades of colonial rule. They had been accustomed to their traditional way of life, and when this was interfered with they had been under foreign rule which although wasn't the kindest administration it kept them from getting out at one another. With their independence though, comes new responsibilities but it also comes with a massive power vacuum that has simply been filled by the conflicting tribal groupings that have to co-exist in their "countries" with their rivals.
The African colonies eventually gained their freedom later on in the 20th century. Almost all of the British, French and Belgian colonies struggled as independent nations when they gained their liberty, though. Most of the new African nations did not have a capable citizenry. However, some of the former British colonies had more capable citizens than the former French and Belgian colonies because of the importance of the education due to the missionaries.
On the whole, Europe's colonization of Africa underdeveloped the continent. Europeans had exploited the resources throughout the nation without making much progress in developing the colonies it controlled. Due to the slave trade and the virtual slavery in many of the European colonies in Africa, the number of inhabitants in Africa dropped significantly, leaving an insufficient number of natives to cultivate and develop the country, particularly after the African countries had gained their independence. For example, scholars estimate that due to the cruelties perpetrated in the Belgian Congo, Leopold II reduced the area's population by at least 50%.(16) Many Africans were not provided with an education sufficient enough to rule a country in the forced manner of the European model. To complicate matters, the arbitrary boundaries of colonies set during "the Scramble" had originally been made regardless of indigenous ethnic diversity, preventing the formation of unified national spirit necessary to start a new country.
All colonizing nations exploited the countries they occupied and took their riches, the natives however did not benefit one bit, and they were treated a little better than slaves. Children were not allowed to attend school after the age of 12, with the intention to keep the locals as uneducated as possible. Keep them dumb and they will continue to listen. The few good things they left behind like roads, Railroads, some Hospitals and schools had been built for the benefit of the Colonizers and when they left almost nobody knew how to run them. The other thing is that Europe divided Africa as if it was a birthday cake; they drew borders where they did not belong and split ethnic groups. One of the many reasons Africa still has wars. Because Africans are black they are not all the same, they are as varied as we are here in Europe. Just try to make French live together with Germans on soil that belongs to the former or vice-versa; you will have the same problems as they have today in Africa. Colonizing is evil, nobody has the right to go and occupy other people's country just because they have the power to do so.
To sum it up, identified merits were that European colonisation brought a vast amount of technology to a land which had practically been light years behind their European and Asian counterparts. Although they were strongly prosecuted against, the Africans themselves were able to trade with the Europeans (more so prior to full-scale colonisation) and to obtain their goods of which would help them. During the period of occupation, the European powers kept them in line. After they left, chaos ensued. On the other hand, some demerits are that prejudice towards the Africans resulted in atrocities from which the colonists went unpunished for. The Africans were sold en masse around the world to spend their lives as slaves. The society that had been in place prior to colonisation was destroyed. Life would never be the same, and not particularly for the better (judging by the state of modern-day Africa's cities)
the first quarter of the 20th century.
Since colonialism involves the rule or taking of territory of one people by another and without their consent, many people believe that the worst effect of colonialism is the fact that a country, takes land rightfully belonging to natives without any consent, and generally mistreating the natives afterwards. Though whether or not this is the worst effect or not can be contended, it definitely plays a major role in the debate of colonialism. During the Colonial period Tanzania for example has had many benefits in terms of infrastructure at the expense of the population.”(1)
When Europeans divided Africa, most colonizers cared mainly about gold, diamonds, and other resources. The Europeans knew little about Africa’s political and social systems. Many Europeans looked down on Africa’s rich cultures and tried to make Africans more like Europeans. Europeans also created conflicts among ethnic groups that had not existed before. For example, the Belgian rulers of Rwanda-Burundi insisted that everyone carry identity cards saying whether they were Hutu, the ethnic majority, or Tutsi, the minority that had ruled the Hutu. Many people did not know which of these they were. The Belgians decided that anyone who owned more than ten cows was Tutsi. The Tutsi got the best education and jobs. Soon the Hutu were resentful, and a violent conflict began. In 1994, the conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi escalated into a brutal civil war. The Tutsi were victorious and formed a new government in Rwanda. (2)
“Africa did not share in the economic boom that lasted for the first three years of federation. They were taxed on things they bought in the shops such as clothing, footwear and dried milk, and they were charged high prices by white and Asian traders. As prices went up, African wages came down. Socially things were not better. The Race Relating Board was ineffectual. The Moffat Revolutions of 1954 said that everyone had the right to progress according to character, qualifications, training, ability and education without distinction of race, colour and creed but these high-sounding resolutions were never put into effect. There were many instances of racial discrimination. The Lusaka city council tarred the road to the European hospital but not the 180 metres to the African hospital.” (3)
Furthermore, “a white man killed his African employee and was jailed for only a year, but when an African robbed his white employer, he was jailed for five years. The government did little for African education as ANC pointed out, if the government had the principle of partnership at heart, it must give the Africans the same opportunity and standard of technical education and training as the European”. (4)
“Rhodes was supported in the Cape parliament by Hofmeyr’s Afrikaner Bond, which was attracted by his policies encouraging the development of agricultural capitalism. Rhodes government promoted wine exports set, set up a Ministry of Agriculture to aid meat and fruit production, and extended railway lines to carry agricultural produce to market as well as opening up the Northern Cape colony for white settlement.”(5)
“Rhodes proclaimed himself in favour of equal right for every white man south of the Zambezi to bring Afrikaners and English together for a new Cape – dominated confederation. Inheritance of plots was to be by elderly sons only, so that younger sons would have to go to the colony in search of labour. Landless men had to pay an extra labour tax if they did not work abroad. As Rhodes said, “Every black man cannot have three acres and a cow….. it must be brought to them that in future nine-tenths of them will have to spend their lives in daily labour.” In exchange for representation of headman in a local district council, all parliament representation for Glen Grey district was abolished and the sale of liquor was to Africans was banned.” (6)
Then others are that the “human disaster of colonization by whites, and helped to spread off desperate Africans risings against colonial rule. After all it was ox-wagons, mostly owned by whites, which spread the disease and even if it was not deliberately spread by whites to reduce Africans to poverty, it had that effect when whites shot African cattle indiscriminately to prevent the disease spreading.”(7)
“Resistance to colonialism did not only take the form of armed risings led by traditional leaders. Individuals and groups, who might have otherwise welcomed and collaborated with colonialism, protected the aspects of colonial rule such as land alienation or racial discrimination. They made their protests by diplomacy rather than by open revolt.”(8) Apparent collaborators with colonialism, such as Christian converts, often became the most effective resister, and it is out of their secondary resistance to colonial rule that modern nationalist movements developed. On the other hand, the closest collaborators with colonialism – black policemen and mercenaries – were often drawn from the ranks of defeated primary resisters.
From a linguistic viewpoint, one could possibly say that an advantage was the language contact between the coloniser and colonised countries - so the acquisition of English. However the downside was that slaves were not allowed to speak their 'home' languages (for fear of rebellion plots) and eventually lost most of their 'native' languages. Colonialism has always had a bad reputation, with dissidents complaining that it disrupted the peaceful existence of the African society. Others have gone so far to claim that the trouble of Africa is directly related to Colonialism. Chinua Achebe, Mongo Beti and a host of other authors have written blatantly against colonialism. The only exception was Camara Laye, whose favourable setting of Africa was savagely attacked by Mongo Beti. He queried if Laye was not aware of the negative consequences of Colonialism in his native Guinea. Even Chinua Achebe's novel, Things Fall Apart, I think was written to counter the racist claims of Conrad’s novel, Heart of Darkness. (9)
On another note Christianity was already in Africa before the Europeans came to colonise us. A classic example is that of Ethiopia. Christianity was their national religion for years!!!And please do not say that it would never have spread to western Africa and other parts of Africa without colonialism. There were missionaries in many countries before the Europeans decided they wanted to colonise us. We were trading and interacting with Europeans before colonialism. Of course their religions would have spread to us as well through interaction. Africa would have continued changing and developing even without colonialism, because it is impossible for a people (continent) to live in isolation from the world. Africans had already been to North America before colonialism. (10)
Colonialism help to spread religion in particular Christianity to distant countries especially after the mid fifteenth century and after AD1500 when any powerful European countries e.g. Spain began to explore, and expand into the rest of the world. Many people were taken away to work on plantations and mines and therefore learnt many new skills. To add to the above post, shouldn't the first question, be whether these many people wanted to be forced to learn these 'new skills'? After all it wasn't an internship; people were being chained, beaten, raped and killed. A rather high price for the acquisition of learning to sow and reap crops and quarry, don't you think? One would say that any advantages of colonialism were to the European countries (e.g. Britain or Spain) and America. They had a supply of free labour and were able to take the natural resources (e.g. diamonds, gold etc) of the countries which they colonised. (11)
Dr. Livingstone, a missionary and explorer, contributed his life to Africa; to see the gospel proclaimed and discover the mysteries of Dark Africa. Dr. Sas Conradie states
"His (Livingstone's) three C's: Christianity, Civilization and Commerce became the epitome of imperialism, racial superiority and British economic self-interest."
When Livingstone established the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian in Malawi, it spread the Gospel to neighboring countries. African people realized that God loves them and that they can love Him as well was the greatest reward for Livingstone's efforts. Through this, they desired to become educated. Missionaries not only educated these people, but also gave hospital treatment. The Malawi received the name "Warm Heart" of Africa. Sadly this legacy remains under a tremendous threat because of Islam; wherever Christian missionaries have left the Muslims have pressed in to gain control of the Warm Heart.
Colonization in Africa differs to whether it was ultimately "good" or "bad." Struggles in Africa remain common, but inspired people like Dr. Livingstone reached out and showed them God's love. European powers that acquired African colonies primarily cared for themselves; their motives laid in selfishness. Imperialism did help Africa improve its technology, but the people's hearts remained unchanged until the missionaries were established. Exploitation of Africa continues to gradually fall away to Christian teaching of John 13:34, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." (12)
Exploitations of African natural resources such as Minerals, made African to be poor and to depend more in Europeans. Oppressions of Africans and discrimination of Africans such as race discrimination, this was mostly operating in South Africa at Soweto. Also importation of the colonialism in Africa societies led to the following, Intensive exploitations i.e. Land alienation, where Africans forced to live unfertile soil and the good and fertile soil remained by the colonialist, Forced labour, this is that African forced to work in Europeans large plantation and mine with little resting or not , Apart from the above the introduction of the principal and the laws of obtaining the cheap labour in the plantation would made Africans to be more exploited, this is that the working class were provided the card so as to be identified if they worked and those who are not they worked yet, a good example is Kenya which was called Kipande system this system was introduced by the British.(13)
Low wages, here African did hard work which were could not resembles with the wages paid too, Also the colonialist introduce many taxes so as to exploiting the African, these taxes were introduce so as to make Africans to work in the colonialist ,example of such taxes were Hart taxes, kettle taxes, and the head taxes, also Colonialist introduce the Migration labour where the Africans were taken from the low or unproductive areas to the productive areas to work in the plantations and mines, for example in Europe and America, due to this migration it caused loss of manpower in Africa.
Low price of the African Product also made them to be more exploited, that is African goods were sold in very low price which could not even satisfy their personal and the family needs, so due to this African they were themselves engaging in White activities. Similarly to this there were unequal exchange, that is African were exchanging the minerals, ivory which were exchanged by the spoon, cups low grade cloth and beads among others.
Colonialism also brings the layer between the Africans people that is those who are were benefit from the colonialist toward those who were not, due to this it create no unity among the people s of the African as well as the people within the country, hence due to this it bring instability in the country, example the conflict of the land in Kenya.
Also due the colonialism destruct totally Africa culture, this is that many African forgotten their culture and behave like European, people they don’t know they tradition language, food and to live, instead they speaking, dressing eating like European, hence due to this it demoralize the African people especially the youth. Because of wearing it make the people to be more attracted in sexual practice hence more spreading of HIV AIDS.
Despite of the above negative effect but also the colonialism bring some few positive effect, that is during colonialism there was the distribution of the social service, this is that, there is construction of infrastructure, schools and the hospitals which are used up to day, example university of Dar-es-salaam and many other building in South Africa and other area in Africa. Also the innovation of European religion and education brings some changes which benefit African, these education eliminate some bad culture practices and hence make African to match with the Globalization, example the use of Computer, car, and other machines. Apart from these, colonialism leads much development in the economic sector such as Agriculture, and mining sectors, the use modern tools and methods of cultivation, such as Tractors.
One unfortunate result of the African colonization, however, was the fact that the colonizers often mistreated the indigenous inhabitants in African colonies.
Officials in the Belgian Congo won first prize as the most abusive of almost any other colonizer in Africa. After Leopold finally got the Belgian Congo running and making a profit, rumors began to reach Europe of atrocities occurring in the Congo River basin. However, these remote rumors had few witnesses, and fewer who spoke up because Belgium often gave them tax cuts and other benefits to keep them quiet and happy. It was not until 1904 when the British Foreign Office published a report on the Belgian Congo by Casement, that the skeletons in Leopold II's closet became exposed. For in reality, Leopold II used the "Belgian" Congo as a private asset rather than a state colony. He did not care what happened to the inhabitants so long as he profited from the colony's resources. When the British Foreign Office published the report, France paid little attention to it because France had started to follow the lead of the Belgian Congo, exploiting the land at whatever cost to the natives. British humanitarians and Christians, however, were shocked. Great Britain certainly did not treat the natives in British colonies the best, but at least they did not treat them as slaves or wild animals as officials treated them in the Belgian Congo or French Equatorial Africa. …show more content…
(14)
With the European arrival in to Africa, it was followed by enslaving the local populace and in general causing chaos to the ancient social structures which had been formed over centuries by simply tearing it apart, using them all as slaves. This was followed by attempts at serious colonisation. However, from the extreme climate of the continent (ranging from arid to tropical) it was impossible to expand any further than having a few coastal settlements due to the lack of technology available to the Europeans to sustain an attempt without the colonists attriting away. However, even though slave trade was a reason why the Europeans came there were a few more. It was possible that there were many resources further in to the continent that were unavailable to the Western countries and the kingdoms in Europe were able to carve an empire in these foreign lands without intervention from other powers that would normally happen when conquest was attempted in their locality. There were explorers who came to the land lusting for riches and then there missionaries who wanted to "bring culture" to the natives and to convert them to the "true faith" or in pity of the Africans being sold en masse around the world in an attempt to change things.
"One unfortunate result of the African colonization, however, was the fact that the colonizers often mistreated the indigenous inhabitants in African colonies. Officials in the Belgian Congo won first prize as the most abusive of almost any other colonizer in Africa. After Leopold finally got the Belgian Congo running and making a profit, rumours began to reach Europe of atrocities occurring in the Congo River basin.
The old tribal life of the African locals had been undermined and annihilated by the colonists who showed complete contempt for it and during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries drove them from their rural lifestyles in to the new cities they were constructing in Africa.
These were poorly built, overpopulated and were in a terrible state. Even now, there are bitter reminders of their efforts to centralise the African communities in to big cities. They had been that way for millennia since the land hadn't supported large populations and that living in villages had meant that the spread of disease was minimal. If a village got it, it would remain a local issue and they would deal with it (or simply all die without a trace) but by concentrating them all in to cities, with the poor health levels already in place it simply meant that even the smallest disease would spread like a forest fire and cause a large death count. Despite this, the Europeans did bring a vast amount of technology with them. Since they needed it all to simply stay alive in the harsh climate it meant that the Africans were feeling the full effect of it. The colonists mingled with the local populaces too, which meant that they both learnt the ways of the Europeans and benefited from all the things they brought which would be advanced weaponry, industry, medicine and more. Even though all this helped African society to advance, the Europeans weren't teaching them anything. After the First and Second World
Wars, which had completely exhausted the European powers there were strong senses of nationalism on the continent and with the colonies now unprofitable, the Europeans gradually withdrew all the while granting independence to arbitrary states. (15)
It was as if the Europeans had come in to Africa, took everything they could get and simply walked out. When they drew up the borders for the new states, they were nothing but shoddy and they had failed to teach the Africans how to govern themselves after decades of colonial rule. They had been accustomed to their traditional way of life, and when this was interfered with they had been under foreign rule which although wasn't the kindest administration it kept them from getting out at one another. With their independence though, comes new responsibilities but it also comes with a massive power vacuum that has simply been filled by the conflicting tribal groupings that have to co-exist in their "countries" with their rivals.
The African colonies eventually gained their freedom later on in the 20th century. Almost all of the British, French and Belgian colonies struggled as independent nations when they gained their liberty, though. Most of the new African nations did not have a capable citizenry. However, some of the former British colonies had more capable citizens than the former French and Belgian colonies because of the importance of the education due to the missionaries.
On the whole, Europe's colonization of Africa underdeveloped the continent. Europeans had exploited the resources throughout the nation without making much progress in developing the colonies it controlled. Due to the slave trade and the virtual slavery in many of the European colonies in Africa, the number of inhabitants in Africa dropped significantly, leaving an insufficient number of natives to cultivate and develop the country, particularly after the African countries had gained their independence. For example, scholars estimate that due to the cruelties perpetrated in the Belgian Congo, Leopold II reduced the area's population by at least 50%.(16) Many Africans were not provided with an education sufficient enough to rule a country in the forced manner of the European model. To complicate matters, the arbitrary boundaries of colonies set during "the Scramble" had originally been made regardless of indigenous ethnic diversity, preventing the formation of unified national spirit necessary to start a new country.
All colonizing nations exploited the countries they occupied and took their riches, the natives however did not benefit one bit, and they were treated a little better than slaves. Children were not allowed to attend school after the age of 12, with the intention to keep the locals as uneducated as possible. Keep them dumb and they will continue to listen. The few good things they left behind like roads, Railroads, some Hospitals and schools had been built for the benefit of the Colonizers and when they left almost nobody knew how to run them. The other thing is that Europe divided Africa as if it was a birthday cake; they drew borders where they did not belong and split ethnic groups. One of the many reasons Africa still has wars. Because Africans are black they are not all the same, they are as varied as we are here in Europe. Just try to make French live together with Germans on soil that belongs to the former or vice-versa; you will have the same problems as they have today in Africa. Colonizing is evil, nobody has the right to go and occupy other people's country just because they have the power to do so.
To sum it up, identified merits were that European colonisation brought a vast amount of technology to a land which had practically been light years behind their European and Asian counterparts. Although they were strongly prosecuted against, the Africans themselves were able to trade with the Europeans (more so prior to full-scale colonisation) and to obtain their goods of which would help them. During the period of occupation, the European powers kept them in line. After they left, chaos ensued. On the other hand, some demerits are that prejudice towards the Africans resulted in atrocities from which the colonists went unpunished for. The Africans were sold en masse around the world to spend their lives as slaves. The society that had been in place prior to colonisation was destroyed. Life would never be the same, and not particularly for the better (judging by the state of modern-day Africa's cities)